iN THE Hififi CGURT OF KARNATAKA AT Bfigaéajéigtéieét ~
DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY (BF. :2'09'9«k
BEFORE} V
THE HOIVPBLE MR.";..::3:3T1c§Ev-fi.A:§Ar§V't)§a_j~---V.
M.F.A.NQ.§31§...<j';'?.*:é;{3Q8f§\riV§.._.
BETWEEN:
I. THE DiViSiC2¥NA._L wnNzu:';1:R.. V "" "
THE &iNi*:f_E;.D"iN:;:IA'm<3U~RANCE <30. LT'1T).,
L1 0. Ne::,v=,.. _ST~'-{i%iANF.$sRAN;*.RAYANA BLDG,
2 mo<3R;%.M..mu;,-- 1=+?.«§is:tE,«..;~::9..;2s, SHANKARANA}?AY£sNA
M.G;=R'OAD :3AN'GA1L,0IaE, 13? ITS
_MANAC:E;R V V APPELIAINFI'
- (B;.{«'i:f:.zui.E R§\WSfiFxN.KA£<, ABVOCATE}
;s;ii'%2;as;i_£s.1%%;§AR NAB?
' , AGEDLABGUT 5:") YEARS,
5-:;'j(37 §§I3:'¥.A{'.HU'1'AN NMR,
1% ;';%_'I' 190.1232,
x J av,/...::;~ ELNARASIMHAMURTHY
' SW! A CROSS, 6TH MMN,
* ._ }{.N.EXT'ENS}€3N,
TREVENI RGAD,
v;::9,HWANfi'nP1I9A,
BA1\EG.£§LORE 22
PERMANENF R/AT
OMNAGAR €':EI¥.F§ARGA.
2. SM'? MANGALA
AGED AEGUT 4'7 YEARS,
W/O S¥?!.SH¥VASHANKAF.' NAIR,
RfA'i' NCL1232,
CIO D.NARASiMHAMUR'I'HY
ST}-i A CROSS, 6TH MAHKI, "
K. N. EXTENSION, 1.
TRIVE'2Ni R0313,
YESHWADFIHFURA,
BANGALORE 22
PERMANENT KIA'?
QMNAGAR GUIBARGA_
3. MISS REKHA . ._ . V «
AGEI3 ABOUT 23 YEARS, *
ngo SRi.SH!VASHANK;£\)R_ wm:.=',
I"~2fA'I' NO.1L32, 1 ~ " . A4
010 D.N;sR£aSI'£dH£a_ML:RT'HY««. 'V ..
STH A (moss, .*1'H'MA!N,
Tfizvmi 161355;), ' . . ..
Y,E2S¥~IVi{A'§!fPHF'§.IwRA;,-..
rsarmgzozegzza
PER:v:.I3NEi'1'f' R}'}=~.{T"
_()MNA(;A}2 GI}s.¥aARc';A.
* _ 4. <iH.xNDR}L'KU«:v5AR
' ACZ.EE3_£XBOU'i' 43 YEARS,
" S;,i_O'*V.NA%&_§i}NhIAH,
%3.W1'*{Ef% jm?..q'HE TRUCK
"-.7Rf8;'i7'."NO',::17i5, P.C.'I'. EXTENSION,
r;s*rmc'r,
" 1<aLA;:2"363 101. RESPONDENTS
= (By Sri.”V”s N mmmva £42395? F01? C;[R.i-3:
V N'(“3fE’I(1F. TO R4 DISPENSER WITH)
MFA FILED UIS 173(1) OF MV ACT’ AGAINST THE
V’ ‘”;rtrn(:M1a:m ANT) AwAn¥3 m.’r*1f«:n: QBQQOOS PASE§i32¥3 ¥?~i MVC
NO. E3183/ZOGE5 ON THE. FKLE OF THE HI ADDL. JUDGE, COURT
OF SMALL CA{I§§ES, MEMBER, MACT’, METROPOLITIAN AREA,
…”¥’1″:é: “<':cm.ter1_t"s 0f't=',xE'1*iVhit R3 are not snflicient tn pmve
thfiait' not permitted to drive heavy goods
'.;0_t %.'na(ie any reference ta nniadfin weight of vehicle to
VA .. _»V_j:f1stify* its contention that the driving licence was issued
4. The imamefi counsel for insurance cotgngmginy
would submit that the insured vehicle is 3
vehicle thfirefore, the ririver of insured
holding a Vaiid and efi”e%::~icsd. and 14.4.2005. The
licence was fenéfwéti Viai respect of transport vehicle.
vézhicie… . ‘
“Bg§%”nm the tribunai the insurance company had
to drive a specified ciass of vehicie.
The enntentrion of insurance e0mpany.’that:’fh35i”vifivg;tt ~
iieenee does not relate to 3 tran_s-:.pm_1f; ve”hieie’%:§-1rii’1(§:tVtx:V V’
accepted in View of the definitidix _’
under Section ‘2{2l) ofthe Meter’ “Act. ” L’
Therefore, the tI1’hu r1a1 the
mrttention of the fastened
iiahility on 2
5. (” t?je.mHetter, E do not find
any the findings of the
r.a~ibmVi:a_:.” ” A’ t t V
_ is dismissed.
The ;am01im;——e–eposited by the insurance cempany
$%’1§;l:’}f:1’§’§,Ai’v)<*3:':V§.?i4§'31V'E'1:é-f:«'fff'f'('3('i'f0 mam' 83 eeee- I8, Bangalore.
— ‘ Theféafties are (iireeted to bear their costs.
IUDGE